GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

Castlevania: Lords Of Shadow Successfully Rebooted An Aging Series, And Its Sequel Ruined It

The Castlevania series' 35th anniversary is bittersweet for fans of MercurySteam's first Lords of Shadow game because they can't forget the sequel.

29 Comments

When Castlevania is discussed today--at this point far-removed from any new games in the series--we often hear about the same few retro titles. The original game paved the way for other action-platformers. Symphony of the Night influenced decades of non-linear action-RPGs, including a long line of great games on the Game Boy Advance and DS.

However, another game rarely discussed in these conversations, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, was a radical departure from the series' past that drew more from Zelda and God of War than it did from Castlevania. Its departures from the series' conventions only helped make its big twist even more unexpected--and its ending was so badass that it only made Lords of Shadow 2 more disappointing.

Spoilers for Castlevania: Lords of Shadow series to follow!

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow
Castlevania: Lords of Shadow

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow works because of the series' already-long legacy when it launched, not in spite of it. Starring Gabriel Belmont--a new character whose surname is recognizable to any Castlevania fan--Lords of Shadow spends much of its lengthy playtime focused on a story that doesn't feel quite like Castlevania. Gabriel's wife Marie has died, and he's determined to complete a mission that will apparently result in her resurrection. It's a story that wouldn't be out of place in any number of action-adventure games, including a major inspiration like God of War. The trick here, however, is that developer MercurySteam wanted longtime fans to feel a little frustrated while they were playing. Sure, Gabriel had a whip, but where were the spooky bats? Where was Death? And, of course, where was Dracula?

Those players would have to stick around for an after-credits cutscene to have those questions fully answered. Zobek--a magical man voiced by Patrick Stewart who aided Gabriel for much of the game--was Death all along, albeit appearing more often as a soft-voiced narrator than as a spectral horror. And Dracula had actually been in the game too... sort of. The tormented Gabriel became Dracula, living into the modern day and adopting the name, as a result of the events of the game. But with his wife still dead, his vampiric power had become a curse, with the immortal Belmont yearning for eternal rest in place of eternal life. Zobek offered Gabriel that luxury if he would stop Satan's acolytes from resurrecting him.

A terrific little pile of secrets

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow - Mirror of Fate HD
Castlevania: Lords of Shadow - Mirror of Fate HD

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow and its 3DS sequel Castlevania: Lords of Shadow - Mirror of Fate (yes, it's a bad name) both play on existing expectations of Castlevania lore, even regarding existing characters. In the original canon, as well as the Netflix animated series, Trevor Belmont--a vampire-hunter and Castlevania III protagonist--and Dracula's son Alucard are separate people. They're often together, and occasionally battle each other. This isn't the case here--via Mirror of Fate's reverse-chronological story, we learn Trevor became Alucard after being killed by Dracula, who just so happened to be his father. Dracula only realized this as Trevor drew his last breaths, and the son woke as a vampire on a personal mission to destroy Dracula. It's a twist that subverts our expectations while also feeling in line with the previous version of Alucard, and it gives more emotional weight and meaning to the young vampire's mission.

Both of these games were setting the stage for an incredible finale--for a game that would see Dracula fight the literal Satan, cure his immortality, and die knowing that he had redeemed himself, reverting from prince of darkness to the brave warrior who loved his family he had once been. He would finally team up with Alucard to fight a common enemy, with father and son conquering their personal demons while slaughtering an army of literal ones.

What a horrible night to have a sequel

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2
Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2

It's just a shame we never got that game, because Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2's story sucks. No, not in a fun vampire way, but in such a confusing way that it seemed like completely different people wrote it. Characters' motivations seem to completely change from one game to the next, particularly with regard to Patrick Stewart's Zobek--a character you have to fight unexpectedly in one of the worst boss fights of the entire game. There were improvements made elsewhere, to be fair, particularly with more complex and flashy combat, as well as a free-turning camera in place of the fixed one from the first game. But, even if your combat is fantastic, there needs to be a reason to fight, and Lords of Shadow 2 just doesn't seem to know what that reason is.

Did different people write the games? Well, partially. Director and MercurySteam studio head Enric Alvarez was one of four writers, alongside producer Dave Cox, on the first game. Alvarez's writing contributions appear to have been greater in Lords of Shadow 2, with "written and directed by" in the credits. Cox, meanwhile, is not listed as a writer on Lords of Shadow 2 but did get a writing credit on Mirror of Fate. Whatever the reason was, however, it's striking how little respect Lords of Shadow 2 seemed to have for all of the setup and earned emotional moments from the previous games.

It seemed all too eager to throw them out without a good reason why, save for having another "twist" that didn't feel as earned as the original Gabriel-is-Dracula reveal did. Rather than fulfill his destiny and finally rest, Dracula chooses to destroy the Mirror of Fate and forge his own destiny. Out of context, it sounds like a cool way to end the series, but this is a man who has wanted to die for literally hundreds of years. Twists work when the seeds have been planted without the audience realizing it. They don't work like the one in Lords of Shadow 2, as it seemed to have been chosen entirely at random.

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2 should have been an incredible and bittersweet conclusion to the personal tale of one of gaming's most tragic characters. Instead, it sullied what came before it, giving each twist less meaning and leaving us wondering if Gabriel Belmont's whole story had been a waste of time. The only reason I'm still thinking about the game more than eight years after it was released is because it could have--and should have--been so much more. MercurySteam had already done the unthinkable by producing a reboot of a classic gaming franchise that players actually liked, but it seemed to second-guess every decision it had made in that game when developing Lords of Shadow 2. If the team ever wants to call a mulligan and just try again, I'm willing to pretend the first Lords of Shadow 2 never existed. Well, except for this.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 29 comments about this story
29 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for ceelogreen94
ceelogreen94

596

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

the first one was great enjoyed it but the second one did fall flat for me, it just didn't really have a story to it.

2 • 
Avatar image for Deltath
Deltath

88

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Lords of Shadow was a bad game, but it wasn't a good Castlevania game. If that had been the gameplay and design of the franchise going forward, I'd rather it have stayed dead. Which.. it basically did!

Lords of Shadow had a cool story, but it also blew away the existing canon, which had been developed for decades and it would have been more fun if they'd tried to tie it together better rather than ignore it. The gameplay, however, was a little dull. It felt like a poor man's imitation of God of War with elements of Uncharted.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for texasgoldrush
texasgoldrush

15282

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

Lords of Shadow 2 has a Very Positive rating on Steam....83%

Once again games journalism speaks without a clue on what is reality.

2 • 
Avatar image for cboye18
cboye18

4153

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

Edited By cboye18

I tried playing the first Lords of Shadow a couple of months ago but if felt like an unpolished God of War game. Controls are kind of clunky. Maybe I should retry it and see if it gets better.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for gamingsdead
gamingsdead

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Yeah the first two are great but los2 fell flat. The story was off and was more like a kids cartoon then a tragic tale. A lot of the gameplay sections like stealth 🥷 were not organic or designed poorly. The stealth in games like spider man, assassins creed or the last of us part 2 are done better. I even enjoyed the stealth sections in the game medium but it was a slow paced game with bad animation movements. If you want to study a game that uses the whip well I would recommend darksiders 3 and turn off the lock 🔒 on mechanics

Upvote • 
Avatar image for unlce_remus
unlce_remus

11

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

I completely disagree with it. I don`t know who has written this article but I think doesn`t have a good vertu in the field of video games. Yes, probably it`s true that Lords of Shadow 2 doesn`t have a very big story but I think that is the game which you probably play it less for the story and more for the gameplay. And to tell the truth, I think Lords of Shadow 2 has a better gameplay than the 1st, they`ve corrected more things in it and it was somehow smoother and more unified in gameplay than the 1st. I`ve played it through on Playstation 3 and everything was correct with it, I didn`t find any greater problem with it. I would appreciate a new episode of it but I think as we can see how Konami handles its most precious IP`s recently, there`s not much chance to receive one in the near future....

Upvote • 
Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

12513

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 94

User Lists: 1

Edited By RSM-HQ

Disagree, but I don't hate the first game, in fact I enjoyed it.

Was never against Lords of Shadow as a spin-off but knowing Konami had no interest in Classic/MetroidVania's anymore despite them being critically praised and selling well was a soar note, Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia and Adventures ReBirth are well received games despite this article claiming otherwise. Did Lords sell more? yes, it was also on four platforms while those prior games are on one. Furthermore the budget difference I would imagine is drastically different.

As such both Konami and Lord games got what they deserved honestly, they got cocky and decided they didn't need the CastleVania everyone loved anymore. Many know CastleVania was more than what Lords offered.

LoS on it's best day was an alternative to God of War, and nothing more. It's a good game and if handled alongside the mainline games I think no one would have cared. Konami had different plans. As did Mercury Steam; doing so would set them back years before getting creditability back.

I am one of those people who backed Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night, and not because I hated Lords of Shadow. But because I think CastleVania has a place in gaming and should not be shrugged away as harshly as Konami decided.

2 • 
Avatar image for tbird7586
tbird7586

835

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Nah they both sucked ass

2 • 
Avatar image for Pyrosa
Pyrosa

10650

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

Nah; I wasn't a fan. Never played it again after the first hour or so... There were just too many other, better, 3D combat + exploration options on the table at that point, so this was kind of a wet thud for me.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for illegal_peanut
illegal_peanut

4207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By illegal_peanut

LoS of was a complete and utter mess of a reboot. It pretty much killed all the lore it establishes. And pretty much leaves the world weightless at the end of the story.

I mean they were trying to write the Belmonts as something grander. But all they showed was that the Belmonts do a great job littering the world with their own dead bodies. And that their best members are the cause of the world's evil. And the best non-evil members are two old goats and an insane man who thinks he can bring his wife back from the dead.

And the funny part is. You would think a man who has been battling and studying the undead his entire life. Would know this was a stupid idea. But, nope. No, he doesn't...

2 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-627847c518a1e
deactivated-627847c518a1e

502

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Forget the story. The first 4 did not have much of a story, just press start, walk up to the gate, use a Belmont, go kill Dracula! Playing any of the LOS ones doesn't really have Castlevania style monsters, vampires, etc. It just didn't feel like Castlevania. I hear they are making a new one, and I hope if it goes third person, make it feel like a real Castlevania game! If not, just do it like Symphony of the Night, with maybe some modern graphics, like Bloodstained RON.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for danmonger
Danmonger

293

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By Danmonger

Loved LOS. The medieval gothic setting was done well. Hated the sequel. It was completely jarring and immersion breaking to have stealth sections, running around like a coward, from a bunch of B rated goons, when you're Lord Dracula!!

The contemporary setting was boring and the level design being bland, uninspired didn't help either.

2 • 
Avatar image for s1taz4a3l
s1taz4a3l

1076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

I played both and liked them both, combat was much better in Los2. Anyone praising god of war 3 and trashing this are hypocrites. Plot of GoD 3 was like an uwe boll movie, it took me like 10 hours to beat gow3 on hard, while LoS1-2 gave me like 40h each of pure fun.

While on the first one, i didnt have a controller at the time since you could play DMCs at the time with mouse+ keyb and be SSS but LoS1 had a couple of sequences that required you to make a circle O_o!!! On some bird nest and another part, which was impossible with keyb, luckily i wasnt the only one without a controller and somebody on steam made a script so you could emulate a circle with the push of a button.

I was stuck for a day probably in that part till i search the web. Which also, at the time i just started living on my own so i didnt even had internet!! Yes!! I had to go to a cafe to leech web to search for the solution!

2 • 
Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

12513

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 94

User Lists: 1

@s1taz4a3l: God of War III has better gameplay than Lords 2. Then again if we compared GoW3 to DMC's, Bayonetta, and Ninja Gaiden's it's noticeable. Lord of Shadow 2's problem was the horrific pacing and had no real sense of focus.

2 • 
Avatar image for illegal_peanut
illegal_peanut

4207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By illegal_peanut

@s1taz4a3l: It was the third part of a single story. It's one of the things you can't treat as a separate piece. You have to add in the previous ones with it to really show how epic it actually is/was. Like avengers infinity war and Endgame, lord of the ring return of the king, or The hobbit and the battle of the five armies. So, saying God of war 3's story is bad because it makes no sense by itself really shows your lack of comprehension there.

Second, the only reason lords of shadow was so long. Because they added a whole bunch of junk that wasn't even that fun. Like those god-awful titan battles which are a mix bag of easy and impossibly hard. Since you REALLY can't tell what to grab on to with some of them (more especially the last one). And for some stupid ass reason. You can only use the combat cross in combat against major boss fights. Meaning it has less variety than God of war, and the earlier released Dante's Inferno. Which both allowed you to pick a unique playstyle with each playthrough. Dante's inferno had Holy, Unholy, and half & half. Plus it could be varied with relics. And in god of war III you had the Blades of Exile, Claws of hades, Nemean Crestus, and Nemesis Whip. And just like DI, you can change it up even more with side items and special abilities. In lords of shadow, you can use the daggers, holy water, fairies, and demon crystal. Which all end up being useless by the end of the game. Because it doesn't stop many of the later enemies. And bosses end up being immune to all of your special attacks. And you're better off just using your whip instead.

To make it even worse. You're combos become useless in the latter half of the game. Since they don't stun-lock many enemies to allow you to juggle them. Plus, it leaves you more open to attack. Meaning the EP points in the game become EXTREMELY useless in the latter 2/3 of the game for combos, along with your items.

So, by the end of the game. Instead of slashing the enemy with Death’s scythe, hitting them with a stomping might of atlas, sending them flying in the air, and then having them breakdance in the air via shooting them with two enchanted pistols. You're just dodging and tapping "X" or "square" the entire time. Which is pretty much dark souls, but you get to only use the whip and nothing else. Plus, it’s hard for no reason in many areas.

To top it off, LoS story is pretty standard. It doesn’t help that it feels like the video game equivalent of shoving 3 seasons of a TV show into one long incoherent movie, made by a B-movie director. Its story is also just god of war written by someone in middle school who likes too much anime. And for a reboot, it does a terrible job of building lore. Since it kills the lore right before it gets established. With the formula being, “[Show thing] > [Give context] > [Kill it or destroy it shortly after or later in the end] > [repeat].”. It doesn’t help that Gabriel kills every character at the end of the game (And or gets them killed). And then what made it worse is they added extra DLC to give more context. But it ends up making even less sense than before. And makes it even more confusing.

All and all I give CastleVania LoS 1 a 6/10. And due to the insane length of the first one. I can’t see myself touching LoS 2.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for rancid36
rancid36

349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

I did like the first Lord of Shadows. Yes, it was a departure, but it felt right at the time. The 2nd was underwhelming and honestly, I don't think I finished it. I have them both in my Steam library. I may take a 2nd look...:)

3 • 
Avatar image for deth420
deth420

1302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 0

I was always a big fan of the series. we used to play simons quest a lot. Unfortunately the series didnt last. the lords of shadow series wasnt very good, game play wise. the alternate story line seemed fine.

In my mind dark souls has been the spiritual successor to the castlevania series. I would love to see a new series for castlevania. especially with the anime doing so well. it got me hooked on the universe again.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for The_Mighty_KELP
The_Mighty_KELP

137

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I detested Lords of Shadow. It was the only game that I ever forced myself to finish, just for the sake of finishing. The writing was horrible, the characters flat and pointless, the gameplay was seemingly designed to punish you for trying to enjoy it, and it was the worst exercise in frustration I've ever willingly subjected myself to. I'd rather play Castlevania 64 again than ever touch LoS. In fact, I have. And no, I'm not just saying all that without any foundation, I can back up every one of my opinions with fact. (Not that I will if someone asks me to in this comments section, because that'd require me revisiting an article on LoS, which I won't do.)

That being said, Mirror of Fate (I played the HD version on 360) was actually pretty decent. The plot was dumb, and I didn't like how they handled the established characters, but the gameplay at least was good, and the music was okay.

2 • 
Avatar image for kludd40
kludd40

3

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By kludd40

Other way around. LoS was the shittest reboot ever turning a legendary series into Lame God of War Knockoff #57. LoS2 fixed most of the problems but nobody really cared to play a sequel because the reboot was so shit.

2 • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

19962

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By mogan  Moderator

The subhead currently says it's the 35-hour anniversary. I know the games industry loves bringing back classic franchises, but less than a day and half is just too soon. : p

3 • 
Avatar image for gabegurwin
gabegurwin

1400

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

gabegurwin  Staff

@mogan: lol thank you for pointing this out

3 • 
Avatar image for petebonion
PeteBonion

82

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

I'll never understand why the media decided to hate Lord of Shadow 2 and make sure it flopped but I really loved the game and actually prefer it to the 1st one.

The majority of the bosses were fun to fight (Toymakers is one of the best) and loved the pacing of the game.

2 • 
Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

12513

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 94

User Lists: 1

@petebonion: It certainly had pacing issues.

2 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64efdf49333c4
deactivated-64efdf49333c4

21783

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 0

@petebonion: Those stealth sequences...they were horrid.

4 • 
Avatar image for ticklemepink
ticklemepink

290

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@petebonion: same

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Fandango_Letho
Fandango_Letho

6204

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 41

User Lists: 0

I liked both games.

2 • 
Avatar image for ticklemepink
ticklemepink

290

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Fandango_Letho: yep

2 • 
Avatar image for Thanatos2k
Thanatos2k

17660

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Honestly, I thought Lords of Shadow 1 was good. I don't think it rebooted the series though - it was completely its own thing and not in any way a replacement for a legitimate SoTN type Castlevania game that Konami will never make again.

4 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64efdf49333c4
deactivated-64efdf49333c4

21783

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 0

@Thanatos2k: Still, for what it was, it was a good attempt and that's what matters and was the point of the article. And Mirror of Fate was more along the lines of a Metroidvania, so we know they still had the means and the inclination to continue developing those kinds of games.

No, what happened is Konami gambled on gambling and lost the bet. The only way things can turn around is if Sony buys their IPs or something. Modern Castlevania would work very well as a Souls-like (they already are in many ways; 2D Souls-likes are generally just Metroidvanias).

3 •